COMMITMENTS AND CONTINGENCIES

From time to time, we are involved in legal proceedings that are incidental to the operation of our businesses. Some of these proceedings allege damages relating to environmental exposures, intellectual property matters, copyright infringement, personal injury claims, employment and employee benefit matters, government contract issues and commercial or contractual disputes, sometimes related to acquisitions or divestitures. We will continue to defend vigorously against all claims. Although the ultimate outcome of any legal matter cannot be predicted with certainty, based on present information including our assessment of the merits of the particular claim, as well as our current reserves and insurance coverage, we do not expect that such legal proceedings will have any material adverse impact on our financial statements, unless otherwise noted below.

Asbestos Matters

Background

ITT, including its subsidiary Goulds Pumps, Inc., has been joined as a defendant with numerous other companies in product liability lawsuits alleging personal injury due to asbestos exposure. These claims generally allege that certain products sold by us or our subsidiaries prior to 1985 contained a part manufactured by a third party (e.g., a gasket) which contained asbestos. To the extent these third-party parts may have contained asbestos, it was encapsulated in the gasket (or other) material and was non-friable.

As of December 31, 2013, there were 61 thousand pending active claims against ITT, including Goulds Pumps, filed in various state and federal courts alleging injury as a result of exposure to asbestos. Activity related to these asserted asbestos claims during the period was as follows:



(in thousands)	2013		2012		2011
Pending claims – Beginning	96		105		104
New claims	5		4		5
Settlements	(3	)	(1	)	(2	)
Dismissals^(a)	(19	)	(12	)	(2	)
Pending claims – Ending	79		96		105
Pending inactive claims^(a)	18		29		39
Pending active claims	61		67		66

(a)

The 2013, 2012, and the 2011 dismissals reported in the table above include the dismissal of approximately 12 thousand ,12 thousand, and 10 thousand claims respectively, which were considered pending inactive claims. Inactive claims represent pending claims in Mississippi filed prior to 2004, which have been excluded from our asbestos measurement because the plaintiffs cannot demonstrate a significant compensable loss. As such, management believes these claims have little to no value.

Frequently, plaintiffs are unable to identify any ITT or Goulds Pumps product as a source of asbestos exposure. Our experience to date is that a majority of resolved claims are dismissed without any payment from the Company. Management believes that a large majority of the pending claims have little or no value. In addition, because claims are sometimes dismissed in large groups, the average cost per resolved claim, as well as the number of open claims, can fluctuate significantly from period to period. The average cost per resolved claim, including indemnity and defense costs, for the past three years, has been within a range of $3 to $19 thousand. ITT expects more asbestos-related suits will be filed in the future, and ITT will aggressively defend or seek a reasonable resolution, as appropriate.

Estimating the Liability and Related Asset

The Company records an asbestos liability, including legal fees, for costs estimated to be incurred to resolve all pending claims, as well as unasserted claims estimated to be filed against the Company over the next 10 years. The asbestos liability has not been discounted to present value due to an inability to reliably forecast the timing of future cash flows. The methodology used to estimate our asbestos liability for pending claims and claims estimated to be filed over the next 10 years relies on and includes the following:


•	interpretation of a widely accepted forecast of the population likely to have been exposed to asbestos in the workplace;


•	widely accepted epidemiological studies estimating the number of people likely to develop mesothelioma and lung cancer from exposure to asbestos;


•	the Company’s historical experience with the filing of non-malignant claims against it and the historical relationship between non-malignant and malignant claims filed against the Company;


•	analysis of the number of likely asbestos personal injury claims to be filed against the Company based on such epidemiological and historical data and the Company’s recent claims experience;


•	analysis of the Company’s pending cases, by disease type;


•	analysis of the Company’s recent experience to determine the average settlement value of claims, by disease type;


•	analysis of the Company's recent experience in the ratio of settled claims to total resolved claims, by disease type;


•	analysis of the Company’s defense costs in relation to its indemnity costs;


•	adjustment for inflation in the average settlement value of claims and defense costs estimated to be paid in the future; and


•	analysis of the Company’s recent experience with regard to the length of time to resolve asbestos claims.

Asbestos litigation is a unique form of litigation. Frequently, the plaintiff sues a large number of defendants and does not state a specific claim amount. After filing of the complaint, the plaintiff engages defendants in settlement negotiations to establish a settlement value based on certain criteria, including the number of defendants in the case. Rarely do the plaintiffs seek to collect all damages from one defendant. Rather, they seek to spread the liability, and thus the payments, among many defendants. As a result, the Company is unable to estimate the maximum potential exposure to pending claims and claims estimated to be filed over the next 10 years.

The forecast period used to estimate our potential liability to pending and projected asbestos claims is a judgment based on a number of factors, including the number and type of claims filed, recent experience with pending claims activity and whether that experience is expected to continue into the future, the jurisdictions where claims are filed, the effect of any legislative or judicial developments, and the likelihood of any comprehensive asbestos legislation at the federal level. These factors have both positive and negative effects on the dynamics of asbestos litigation in the tort system and, accordingly, our estimate of the asbestos exposure. Developments related to asbestos tend to be long-cycle, changing over multi-year periods. Accordingly, we monitor these and other factors and periodically assess whether an alternative forecast period is appropriate.

The Company retains a consulting firm to assist management in estimating the potential liability for pending asbestos claims and for claims estimated to be filed over the next 10 years based on the methodology described above. Our methodology determines a point estimate based on our assessment of the value of each underlying assumption, rather than a range of reasonably possible outcomes. Projecting future asbestos costs is subject to numerous variables and uncertainties that are inherently difficult to predict. In addition to the uncertainties surrounding the key assumptions discussed above, additional uncertainty related to asbestos claims and estimated costs arises from the long latency period prior to the manifestation of an asbestos-related disease, changes in available medical treatments and changes in medical costs, changes in plaintiff behavior resulting from bankruptcies of other companies that are or could be co-defendants, uncertainties surrounding the litigation process from jurisdiction to jurisdiction and from case to case, and the impact of potential legislative or judicial changes. At December 31, 2013, approximately 35% of the recorded asbestos liability relates to pending claims, with the remainder relating to claims estimated to be filed over the next 10 years.

We record a corresponding asbestos-related asset that represents our best estimate of probable recoveries from our insurers for the estimated asbestos liabilities. Consistent with the asbestos liability, the asbestos-related asset has not been discounted to present value due to the inability to reliably forecast the timing of future cash flows. In developing this estimate, the Company considers coverage-in-place and other agreements with its insurers, as well as a number of additional factors. These additional factors reviewed include the financial viability of our insurance carriers and any related solvency issues, the method by which losses will be allocated to the various insurance policies and the years covered by those policies, the extent to which settlement and defense costs will be reimbursed by the insurance policies and interpretation of the various policy and contract terms and limits and their interrelationships, and various judicial determinations relevant to our insurance programs. The timing and amount of reimbursements will vary due to a time lag between when ITT pays an amount to defend or settle a claim and when a reimbursement is received from an insurer, differing policy terms and certain gaps in our insurance coverage as a result of uninsured periods, insurer insolvencies, and prior insurance settlements. Approximately 86% of our estimated receivables are due from insurers that had credit ratings of A- or better from A.M. Best as of December 31, 2013.

In addition, the Company retains an insurance consulting firm to assist management in estimating probable recoveries for pending asbestos claims and for claims estimated to be filed over the next 10 years based on the analysis of policy terms, the likelihood of recovery provided by external legal counsel, and incorporating risk mitigation judgments where policy terms or other factors are not certain. The aggregate amount of insurance available to the Company for asbestos-related claims was acquired over many years and from many different carriers. Amounts deemed not recoverable generally are due from insurers that are insolvent, or result from disagreements with the insurers over policy terms, coverage limits or coverage disputes. Such limitations in our insurance coverage are expected to result in projected payments to claimants substantially exceeding the probable insurance recovery.

The Company has negotiated with certain of its insurers to reimburse the Company for a portion of its indemnity and defense costs through “coverage-in-place” agreements or policy buyout agreements. The agreements are designed to facilitate the collection of ITT’s insurance portfolio, to mitigate issues that insurers may raise regarding their responsibility to respond to claims, and to promote an orderly exhaustion of the policies. These agreements, in the aggregate, represent approximately 59% of the recorded asbestos-related asset as of December 31, 2013.

After reviewing our portfolio of insurance policies, with consideration given to applicable deductibles, retentions and policy limits, the solvency and historical payment experience of various insurance carriers, existing insurance settlements, and the advice of outside counsel with respect to the applicable insurance coverage law relating to the terms and conditions of its insurance policies, ITT believes that its recorded receivable for insurance recoveries is probable of collection.

Estimating our exposure to pending asbestos claims and those that may be filed in the future is subject to significant uncertainty and risk as there are multiple variables that can affect the timing, severity, quality, quantity and resolution of claims. Any predictions with respect to the variables impacting the estimate of the asbestos liability and related asset are subject to even greater uncertainty as the projection period lengthens. In light of the uncertainties and variables inherent in the long-term projection of the Company’s asbestos exposures, although it is probable that the Company will incur additional costs for asbestos claims filed beyond the next 10 years which could be material to the financial statements, we do not believe there is a reasonable basis for estimating those costs at this time.

The asbestos liability and related receivables reflect management’s best estimate of future events. However, future events affecting the key factors and other variables for either the asbestos liability or the related receivables could cause actual costs or recoveries to be materially higher or lower than currently estimated. Due to these uncertainties, as well as our inability to reasonably estimate any additional asbestos liability for claims which may be filed beyond the next 10 years, it is not possible to predict the ultimate cost of resolving all pending and unasserted asbestos claims. We believe it is possible that future events affecting the key factors and other variables within the next 10 years, as well as the cost of asbestos claims filed beyond the next 10 years, net of expected recoveries, could have a material adverse effect on our financial statements.

Income Statement Charges

In the third quarter of each year, we conduct our asbestos remeasurement with the assistance of outside consultants to review and update the underlying assumptions used in our asbestos liability and related asset estimates and to determine the cost the Company estimates will be incurred to resolve all pending claims, as well as unasserted claims estimated to be filed over the next 10 years. In each remeasurement, the underlying assumptions are updated based on actual experience since the previous annual remeasurement and we reassess the appropriate reference period of years of experience used in determining each assumption and our expectations regarding future conditions, including inflation. Based on the results of the remeasurement, we decreased our estimated undiscounted asbestos liability, including legal fees, by $65.0, $75.8, and $44.1 in 2013, 2012, and 2011, respectively.

The decrease in our estimated liability in 2013 is a result of several developments, including an expectation of lower defense costs relative to indemnities paid over the projection period and favorable experience in the ratio of cases dismissed versus settled. These favorable impacts were offset in part by an increase in average settlement values, an increasing number of cases expected to be adjudicated, and by increased activity in several higher-cost jurisdictions.

The decrease in our estimated liability in 2012 is a result of several developments, including an expectation of lower defense costs as a percentage of indemnities paid over the projection period and a reduction in the assumed rate of increase in future average settlement values. These favorable factors were offset in part by an increasing number of cases expected to be adjudicated, increased activity in several higher-cost jurisdictions, an increase in average settlement values and an increase in lung cancer activity.

The decrease in our estimated liability in 2011 was a result of several developments; including a reduction in the assumed rate of increase in future average settlement costs and an expectation of lower defense costs as a percentage of indemnities paid. These favorable factors were offset in part by increased activity in several higher-cost jurisdictions, increasing the number of cases expected to be adjudicated.

Further, in the third quarters of 2013, 2012 and 2011 the Company reduced its estimated asbestos-related assets by $65.5, $78.7, and $75.8, respectively, based on the results of the remeasurement. The decrease in our asbestos-related assets is primarily the result of the decrease in the estimated liability and changes in our recovery assumptions. At each balance sheet date, ITT compares current asbestos claims and resolution activity and changes in insurer credit ratings to the results of the most recent annual remeasurement to assess whether the recorded asbestos liability and related asset remain appropriate. In addition to the charges associated with our annual measurement, we record a net asbestos charge each quarter to maintain a rolling 10-year forecast period.

The tables below summarize the total net asbestos charges for the years ended December 31, 2013, 2012 and 2011.



	2013			2012			2011
Continuing operations:
Asbestos provision	$	63.3		$	53.8		$	59.5
Asbestos remeasurement, net	0.5			2.9			40.9
Settlement Agreement	(31.0		)	(5.8		)	—
Net asbestos charge - continuing operations	32.8			50.9			100.4
Discontinued Operations:
Asbestos provision	—			0.5			2.8
Asbestos remeasurement, net	—			—			(9.2		)
Settlement Agreement	—			(5.6		)	—
Net asbestos charge - discontinued operations	—			(5.1		)	(6.4		)
Total net asbestos charge	$	32.8		$	45.8		$	94.0

Changes in Financial Position

The following table provides a rollforward of the estimated asbestos liability and related assets for the years ended December 31, 2013 and 2012.



	2013									2012
	Liability			Asset			Net			Liability			Asset			Net
Balance as of January 1	$	1,347.4		$	607.9		$	739.5		$	1,667.9		$	954.2		$	713.7
Changes in estimate during the period:
Continuing operations	11.4			(52.4		)	63.8			6.6			(50.2		)	56.8
Discontinued operations	—			—			—			11.5			11.0			0.5
Settlement Agreement	—			31.0			(31.0		)	(245.2		)	(233.8		)	(11.4		)
Net cash activity	(94.1		)	(68.7		)	(25.4		)	(93.4		)	(73.3		)	(20.1		)
Balance as of December 31	$	1,264.7		$	517.8		$	746.9		$	1,347.4		$	607.9		$	739.5
Current portion	85.1			84.5						92.4			82.6
Noncurrent portion	1,179.6			433.3						1,255.0			525.3

2013 Settlement Agreement

During 2013, ITT executed a final settlement agreement (the 2013 Settlement) with an insurer to settle responsibility for multiple categories of insured claims, including pending and future product liability claims. Under the terms of the 2013 Settlement, the insurer agreed to a specified series of payments over the course of the next five years, resulting in a one-time benefit of $31.0.

2012 Settlement Agreement

In 2012, we executed an agreement (the 2012 Settlement) with the entity (the counterparty) that acquired a business disposed by ITT in 1986. The 2012 Settlement accelerates the cost sharing provisions of a previous agreement with the counterparty. Prior to executing the 2012 Settlement, claims subject to the previous cost sharing agreement where ITT was not a named defendant were excluded from the count of pending claims; however, our recorded asbestos liability included an estimate of exposure to all claims subject to the cost sharing agreement.

Under the terms of the 2012 Settlement, the counterparty assumed full responsibility for all pending and future asbestos-related claims filed against the disposed business, whether they were served on ITT or the counterparty. However, if the disposed business and other ITT entities were both named in a claim, ITT continues to be responsible for defending the ITT portion(s) of the claim and thus those cases remain in the Company’s count of pending claims and in our estimated asbestos liability. ITT also agreed that certain insurance rights will remain with the pending and future claims filed against the disposed business, benefiting the counterparty.

As a result of the 2012 Settlement, ITT’s asbestos-related liabilities were reduced by $245.2, while the asbestos-related assets were reduced by $233.8. The reduction in the asbestos liability results from eliminating the liability for all asbestos claims filed and estimated to be filed over the next 10 years against the disposed business. In addition, under the 2012 Settlement, ITT received a $10.0 cash payment from the counterparty for past and future costs which would otherwise have been paid by the surrendered insurance. Income from continuing operations reflects a benefit of $5.8 from the 2012 Settlement, while income from discontinued operations reflects a benefit of $5.6 from the 2012 Settlement.

Future Cash Flows:

We estimate that we will be able to recover approximately 41% of the asbestos indemnity and defense costs for pending claims as well as unasserted claims estimated to be filed over the next 10 years from our insurers. Actual insurance reimbursements will vary from period to period and the anticipated recovery rate is expected to decline over time due to gaps in our insurance coverage, reflecting uninsured periods, the insolvency of certain insurers, prior settlements with our insurers, and our expectation that certain insurance policies will exhaust within the next 10 years. Certain of our primary coverage-in-place agreements are exhausted or will be exhausted in the next several months, which may result in higher net cash outflows until excess carriers begin accepting claims for reimbursement. In the tenth year of our estimate, our insurance recoveries are currently projected to be 30%. Additionally, future recovery rates may be impacted by other factors, such as future insurance settlements, insolvencies, and judicial determinations relevant to our coverage program, which are difficult to predict and subject to a high degree of uncertainty.

Further, there is uncertainty in estimating when cash payments related to the recorded asbestos liability will be fully expended. Such cash payments will continue for a number of years beyond the next 10 years due to the significant proportion of future claims included in the estimated asbestos liability and the delay between the date a claim is filed and when it is resolved. Subject to these inherent uncertainties, it is expected that net cash payments related to pending claims and claims estimated to be filed in the next 10 years will extend through approximately 2029.

Annual net cash outflows, net of tax benefits, are projected to average $10 to $20 over the next five years, as compared to an annual average of $14 over the past three annual periods, and increase to an average of approximately $35 to $45 over the remainder of the projection period.

Environmental

In the ordinary course of business, we are subject to federal, state, local, and foreign environmental laws and regulations. We are responsible, or are alleged to be responsible, for ongoing environmental investigation and site remediation. These sites are in various stages of investigation and/or remediation and in many of these proceedings our liability is considered de minimis. We have received notification from the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, and from similar state and foreign environmental agencies, that a number of sites formerly or currently owned and/or operated by ITT, and other properties or water supplies that may be or have been impacted from those operations, contain disposed or recycled materials or wastes and require environmental investigation and/or remediation. These sites include instances where we have been identified as a potentially responsible party under federal and state environmental laws and regulations.

The following table provides a rollforward of the estimated environmental liability and related assets for the years ended December 31, 2013 and 2012.



	2013									2012
	Liability			Asset			Net			Liability			Asset		Net
Balance as of January 1	$	96.1		$	12.3		$	83.8		$	101.8		$	—	$	101.8
Changes in estimates for pre-existing accruals:
Continuing operations	8.5			(0.1		)	8.6			7.1			10.8		(3.7		)
Discontinued operations	1.5			—			1.5			(1.4		)	1.5		(2.9		)
Accruals added during the period for new matters	0.5			—			0.5			—			—		—
Net cash activity	(12.1		)	(0.5		)	(11.6		)	(11.5		)	—		(11.5		)
Foreign currency	0.1			—			0.1			0.1			—		0.1
Balance as of December 31	$	94.6		$	11.7		$	82.9		$	96.1		$	12.3	$	83.8

The following table illustrates the reasonably possible range of estimated liability, and number of active sites for environmental matters.



	2013		2012
Low-end range	$	73.3	$	76.9
High end range	$	168.0	$	167.1
Number of active environmental investigation and remediation sites	60		58

As actual costs incurred at identified sites in future periods may vary from our current estimates given the inherent uncertainties in evaluating environmental exposures, management believes it is possible that the outcome of these uncertainties may have a material adverse effect on our financial statements.

In 2012, the Company recorded a $12.3 asset related to an insurance policy that is responsive to environmental exposures. The asset reflects the Company’s best estimate of costs that are expected to be reimbursed by the insurer for past costs incurred and costs expected to be incurred in the future subject to the various policy terms and limits. The timing and amount of reimbursements will vary and may not be received in the same periods as costs are incurred. Prior to 2012, we had not recorded an asset for potential recoveries because future receipts were not considered probable due to uncertainties associated with the interpretation of policy terms, the insurer’s cost review and approval process, and the pattern of performance of the insurer. In the first half of 2012, the performance of the insurer stabilized and disagreements on coverage for certain sites were resolved with the insurer. Based on these events, combined with a longer history of experience with the insurer, the Company determined it was probable that the insurer would perform in the future in accordance with the terms of the policy and that the amount of potential recovery could be reasonably estimated.

Other Matters

The Company is involved in coverage litigation with various insurers seeking recovery of costs incurred in connection with certain environmental and product liabilities. In a suit filed in 1991, ITT Corporation, et al. v. Pacific Employers Insurance Company et al, Sup. Ct., Los Angeles County, we are seeking recovery of costs related to property damage losses due to environmental issues. Discovery, procedural matters, changes in California law, and various appeals have prolonged this case. For several years, the case was on appeal before the California Court of Appeals from a decision by the California Superior Court dismissing certain claims made by ITT.

On February 13, 2003, we commenced an action, Cannon Electric, Inc. v. Affiliated FM Ins. Co., Sup. Ct., Los Angeles County, seeking recovery of costs from the same coverage referenced above but related to asbestos product liability losses. During this coverage litigation, we entered into coverage-in-place settlement agreements with ACE, Wausau and Utica Mutual dated April 2004, September 2004, and February 2007, respectively. These agreements provide specific coverage for the Company’s legacy asbestos liabilities. In the first quarter of 2012, Goulds Pumps resolved its claims against Fireman’s Fund and Continental Casualty. In January 2012, ITT and Goulds Pumps filed a putative class action suit in federal Court in Connecticut against Travelers Casualty and Surety Company (ITT Corporation and Goulds Pumps Inc., v. Travelers Casualty and Surety Company (f/k/a Aetna Casualty and Surety Company), (Fed Dist Ct, CA NO.3:12-cv-00038-RN)), alleging that Travelers is unilaterally reinterpreting language contained in older Aetna policies so as to avoid paying on asbestos claims. This action was stayed pending a decision by the Superior Court of Los Angeles County in the Cannon action on interpretation of policy language. On January 29, 2014, the Superior Court issued its opinion upholding the Goulds Pumps’ claims that it is entitled to receive reimbursement from Traveler’s for asbestos claims. Goulds Pumps has filed a Motion to Lift the Stay in the Connecticut action. In 2013, the Company finalized a settlement with its insurer PEIC that resolves all outstanding issues between the Company and PEIC related to the primary policies issued by PEIC during the period from 1977 to 1985. PEIC has agreed to make structured payment overtime to a Qualified Settlement Fund (QSF) to be used for asbestos related costs. The Company continues to engage other defendants in settlement negotiations as appropriate.